意定代理权授予错误的效果论  

On the Effect of the Mistake in Authorizing the Agency by Mandate

作　　者：尚连杰[1,2] Shang Lianjie

机构地区：[1]南京大学法学院 [2]南京大学中德法学研究所

出　　处：《比较法研究》2021年第3期122-137,共16页Journal of Comparative Law

基　　金：国家社科基金青年项目“消费者保护视角下瑕疵信息责任研究”(项目编号:16CFX055)的阶段性成果。

摘　　要：当被代理人因存在授权错误而撤销授权行为时,对于相对人的保护,存在强保护模式、弱保护模式及其变体。在解释论上,我国应采取叠加保护模式。被代理人撤销授权行为后,代理人构成无权代理;当相对人为善意时,可构成表见代理。对于损害赔偿,可区分代理人是否知道被代理人存在授权错误:当代理人不知时,由被代理人承担损害赔偿责任;当代理人明知或应知被代理人存在错误时,由被代理人与代理人共同承担损害赔偿责任。此外,应肯定善意相对人对于法律效果的选择的可能性。当相对人存在过失时,根据《民法典》第157条和第171条第4款,通过权衡被代理人、代理人与相对人的过错以实现对损害的分担。当相对人明知时,原则上不予保护,但代理人亦属明知的情形除外。When the principal revokes his authorization because of the mistake in it,the protection of the counter party can be strong and can be weak.The types of protection in China should be superimposed according to the interpretative theory.When the counter party is in good faith,the authorized agency,after the revocation of the authorization,can become the agency by estoppels.Hence,the compensation for the counter party can be determined according to whether the agent knows that the principal has made a mistake in the authorization:if not,the principal shall bear the liability;if the agent knows or should have known it,the principal and the agent shall bear the liability jointly.In addition,whether the counter party is in good faith also determines the effect.If the counter party is at fault,according to Article 157 and Article 171(4)of the Civil Code,the counter party,the principal,the agent shall bear the liability in proportion to their fault.When the counter party knows the agent has no authority,he will,in principle,not be compensated,unless the agent himself knows that too.

关 键 词：授权行为 错误 表见代理 可归责性 损害赔偿 

分 类 号：D923[政治法律—民商法学]